Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

  • #321
    finalunpurez wrote:

    Closed sicllian, c3 sicillian and Bb5+ sidelines is the way to handle book eaters :P

    This is why I like facing the Sicilian as white! Unless you spend a dozen hours for every one that I put into studying theory, it's likely I'll be more prepared.

  • #322
    NachtWulf wrote:
    finalunpurez wrote:

    Closed sicllian, c3 sicillian and Bb5+ sidelines is the way to handle book eaters :P

    This is why I like facing the Sicilian as white! Unless you spend a dozen hours for every one that I put into studying theory, it's likely I'll be more prepared.

    Any dedicated sicilian player does not fear the silly sidelines.

    Maybe it's because I play the english (where I often get a closed sicilian as white) but getting a closed sicilian literally makes me happy. The same goes for alapin or morra gambit(which I transform into alapin with nf6)

     

    It's like.. Well. I'm fine in the opening, time to outplay my opponent instead of ''I really hope he isnt going to play the english attack :xxxxx

  • #323
    whatupyodog2 wrote:

    Why dont you guys learn how to play good before you study all your opening theory crap.

    ...says the guy who specializes in opening novelties.

  • #324
    NachtWulf wrote:
    whatupyodog2 wrote:

    Why dont you guys learn how to play good before you study all your opening theory crap.

    ...says the guy who specializes in opening novelties.

    LOLLaughing

  • #325

    I think they moved to another Parham forum. There has been like 5 or so Parham forums. This is just ridiculous. Chess.com should add Parham to their spell check.LOL

  • #326

    There's a difference between using the Parham and winning games, and memorizing the first 20 moves of the ruy lopez...

  • #327

    But they have the Lopez in their spell check.Tongue out

  • #328

    Both games are filled with blunders. You have got to give us better examples.

  • #329

    White looks pretty retarded here.

  • #330

    Show us that game.

  • #331

    My cat has beaten a Grandmaster in 1-minute game with 1.Na3, which surely enough is better than The Fartham.

  • #332

    I pity you, if you didn't realize that alexlaw was trying to play the Bongocloud in the first game... and am greatly amused by the number of queen moves in the second. Also, >5 min games aren't really chess.

    (Correction: I meant <5)

  • #333

    NachtWulf, don't you mean <5 min.

  • #334

    I was watching the FM game, I think it was a 2 or 3 mintue game.

  • #335
    Eris_Discordia wrote:

    NachtWulf, don't you mean <5 min.

    My mistake, I typed the wrong sign.

  • #336

    On the contrary, I think that Nakamura or some other master stated that playing chess with such short time controls actually was detrimental to their chess, since moves tend to be played based on intuition as opposed to calculation.

  • #337

    Is that why Nakamura is the US champion and in the top 10 in the world?

  • #338

    Recent bullet win against a Parham junkie.  Pretty typical in my experience.



  • #339

    I'd be surprised if Naka exclusively played short blitz games, but I could be wrong. My point is that the 3|0 or 1|0 games being posted by your friend (or alter ego?) appear as poor examples of opening understanding.

  • #340

    Incidentally, you don't see Parham players blunder the queen on move two at time controls longer than blitz.  But on the other hand, you don't really see Parham players win at time controls longer than blitz.

    The modern effectively refutes the Parham.

This forum topic has been locked

Online Now